Assessee was owner of vacant land of 121 cents-He executed a registered General Power of Attorney (GPA) in favour of one V.R. Anuvelarajan, authorising him to deal with said land, including powers of sale. Subsequently, power agent,.R. Anuvelarajan\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 acting under authority of said GPA, executed a registered sale deed transferring only to the extent of 30.35 cents in favour of one Jacaranda Properties Private Ltd for a sale consideration of Rs. 1.00 crores. Assessing Officer held that assessee had received an amount of Rs. 2.50 crores from power agent, and treated same as the full value of consideration for transfer of said 30.35 cents. CIT(A) affirmed the order of the Assessing Officer. On appeal, the Tribunal held that\u00a0\u00a0 GPA holder was not buyer of land and was only authorised to deal with prospective buyers. Further, no consideration was received by assessee for execution of said GPA. Further, there was nothing to demonstrate that said sum of Rs. 2.50 crores was received by assessee from ultimate purchaser. On facts, mere receipt of funds from power agent could not be equated with transfer consideration for the impugned sale transaction, particularly when there was no transfer of capital asset to power agent himself. Accordingly the\u00a0 Assessing Officer was\u00a0 directed to adopt sale consideration at Rs. 1.00 crores instead of Rs. 2.50 crores for purpose of computing taxable long-term capital gains.\u00a0 (AY. 2014-15)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
S. 45: Capital gains-Transfer \u2013General Power of Attorney-Assessee executed GPA authorising agent to deal with land-Agent sold portion thereof to a company-Mere execution of GPA did not constitute transfer under section 2(47) in favour of agent-Only actual sale consideration received for transfer was taxable in assessee\u2019s hands, not any sum received by power agent.[S. 2(47)] <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_feature_clip_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-61147","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-income-tax-act"],"acf":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p9S2Rw-fUf","jetpack-related-posts":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/61147","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=61147"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/61147\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":61148,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/61147\/revisions\/61148"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=61147"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=61147"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=61147"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}